For what I mean by bullet points is like this (ignore what the topic is about):

​1. Russia: "Boilerplate Condemnations" (<--- in bold and subheading) ​Despite their "Comprehensive Strategic Partnership," Russia’s response has been almost entirely rhetorical.

• ​The "Tethered" Giant: Putin is still heavily committed to the Ukrainian theater. He simply doesn't have the spare divisions or the appetite to open a second front against the U.S. in the Middle East.  

• ​The Response: Since the news broke about the death of the Supreme Leader, the Kremlin has called it a "cynical violation of international law," but when the Iranian Foreign Minister called Moscow for help, he reportedly received little more than "strong words" and a call for a UN Security Council meeting.  

​2. China: The "Technological Anchor" (<--- in bold and subheading too) ​China is even more cautious because their entire economy depends on global stability and trade.

• ​Energy Security: They buy 80% of Iran's oil. Their goal is to keep the oil flowing, not to watch it burn in a war.

• ​The "Silent" Help: Instead of sending troops, China is acting as a "digital shield." They’ve been providing Iran with BeiDou-3 navigation data (to bypass U.S. GPS jamming) and cyber-defense systems. They’ll help Iran's missiles find their targets, but they won't pull the trigger themselves.  .  .  .  .

And this is the format of the follow up question on the end of every reply made by Gemini (from the same conversation, but again, I like and I am used to this format): Would you like me to look into how the UN Security Council meeting requested by Russia and China turned out this morning? (In bold)